What to Expect in the 115 th Congress March 30, 2017 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Congressional Investigations 2017: What to Expect in the 115 th Congress March 30, 2017

<Presentation Title/Client Name> Worldwide Capabilities with Local Execution Gibson Dunn is a recognized leader in representing companies ranging from start-up ventures to multinational corporations in all major industries. With more than 1,200 attorneys in 20 offices, Gibson Dunn is committed to providing top-tier legal services – wherever your business may take you. 2

<Presentation Title/Client Name> MCLE Certificate Information This program has been approved for credit in accordance with the requirements of the New York State Continuing Legal Education Board for a maximum of 1.0 credit hour, of which 1.0 credit hour may be applied toward the areas of professional practice requirement. This course is approved for transitional/non-transitional credit. Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP certifies that this activity has been approved for MCLE credit by the State Bar of California in the amount of 1.0 hour. Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP is authorized by the Solicitors Regulation Authority to provide in-house CPD training. This program is approved for CPD Credit in the amount of 1.0 hour. Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (Number 324652). Application for approval is pending with the Texas, Virginia, and Washington State Bars. Most participants should anticipate receiving their certificates of attendance via e-mail in approximately four weeks following the webcast. Members of the Virginia Bar should anticipate receiving the applicable certification forms in approximately six weeks. MCLE questions can be directed to Jeanine McKeown (National Training Administrator) at 213-229- 7140 or jmckeown@gibsondunn.com. 3

<Presentation Title/Client Name> Today’s Panelists F. Joseph Warin Mr. Warin chairs the Washington, D.C. Litigation Department of Gibson Dunn and co- chairs the firm’s White Collar Defense and Investigations Practice Group. Mr. Warin served as Assistant United States Attorney in Washington, D.C. for seven years. His areas of expertise include white collar crime, securities enforcement — including Foreign Corrupt Practices Act investigations — False Claims Act cases, special committee representations, compliance counseling, and complex civil litigation. His representations have involved congressional hearings, federal regulatory inquiries, and criminal investigations. 4

<Presentation Title/Client Name> Today’s Panelists Michael D. Bopp Mr. Bopp chairs Gibson Dunn’s Congressional Investigations Group and co - chairs the firm’s Public Policy practice group. He practices within the firm’s White Collar Defense and Investigations and Crisis Management Practice Groups. Mr. Bopp is a former Staff Director and Chief Counsel of the Committee of Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the Senate’s principal investigative committee and most expansive in terms of jurisdiction. He has led or played a key role in major investigations in both the Senate and House of Representatives, as well as four special investigations. In these capacities, he has developed the strategy and set the agenda for dozens of investigations, conducted hundreds of depositions and witness interviews, managed dozens of subpoenas and massive document discovery efforts, and orchestrated more than 100 committee hearings. 5

<Presentation Title/Client Name> Today’s Panelists Trent J. Benishek A senior associate in the Washington, D.C. office and a member of the firm’s Litigation Department, Mr. Benishek has represented clients in a variety of complex litigation matters before state and federal courts, as well as in investigations by various congressional committees. He currently serves on the firm’s global Associates Committee. Prior to joining Gibson Dunn, Mr. Benishek served as the press secretary on a successful campaign for the U.S. House of Representatives, where he focused on earned media and messaging strategy, debate preparation, and policy development. He also previously worked as a legal intern for the Office of Management and Budget’s Office of the General Counsel. 6

<Presentation Title/Client Name> Today’s Panelists Matt Owen Staff Director and Chief Counsel of the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI), chaired by Senator Rob Portman. Prior to joining the PSI, he served as Chief Counsel to Senator Mike Lee, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy, and Consumer Rights. Mr. Owen is a former law clerk to Judge Neil M. Gorsuch of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit and Justice Antonin Scalia of the U.S. Supreme Court. He also served as a Bristow Fellow in the Office of the Solicitor General in the U.S. Department of Justice. 7

<Presentation Title/Client Name> Congressional Investigations • Authorized by the Constitution. Because the congressional power of inquiry is a power of Congress provided by necessary implication in Article I, generally speaking, it cannot be limited by mere legislation. • Not a “general power” to delve into private affairs and compel disclosures. Rather, “the power of inquiry— with process to enforce it — is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function.” McGrain v. Daugherty , 273 U.S. 135, 173 – 74 (1927). • Investigations must be authorized and aimed at furthering a valid legislative purpose and raise questions that are relevant and capable of explanation to witnesses as to why they are relevant. Wilkinson v. United States , 365 U.S. 399, 408 (1961). • Challenges to a committee’s jurisdiction almost always fail and generally raise the committee’s ire. 8

<Presentation Title/Client Name> Congressional Investigations Differ From Executive Branch Investigations • Coercive authorities and investigative tools may look the same, but in practice are not. • Objections to congressional compulsory process are generally either not recognized or not effective. • Rules are different and vary significantly from committee to committee. • The chairman of the committee generally holds almost all the cards. • Committee enforcement is more often before court of public opinion than court of law. That said, Congress may seek to have individuals prosecuted for contempt, perjury, lying to investigators, or obstruction. • Goals in congressional investigations are often different (punishing/preventing crime v. informing legislation/garnering attention). • Difference between hearings and trials. • Attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine are not always recognized, but it remains important to protect privileged communications and documents. 9

<Presentation Title/Client Name> Purposes of Congressional Investigations • Expose actual criminal or civil wrongdoing • Embarrass a company for “immoral” practices • Advance a policy preference • Advance legislation • Bolster a member’s or party’s political agenda or position 10

<Presentation Title/Client Name> Congressional Investigations: Subpoena Power • Document requests usually begin with a letter and are followed by a subpoena, if necessary. • Every standing committee has the authority to issue subpoenas. This is authorized under both House and Senate rules, but the specific procedures vary by committee. • For example, subpoenas may be authorized: – By the chairman unilaterally, with notice to the ranking member ( e.g. , Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations); – By the chairman unilaterally ( e.g. , House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform); – By the chairman, with approval of the ranking member, but if the ranking member objects, upon committee approval ( e.g. , Senate Finance); or – By a majority vote of the committee. • Some committees require that some minority members be present for the vote. In the 114 th Congress, six additional House committees • empowered their chairman to unilaterally issue subpoenas. • Subpoenas can be friendly. 11

<Presentation Title/Client Name> <Presentation Title/Client Name> Congressional Investigations: Other Investigative Methods • Depositions: – In the 115 th Congress, the House granted staff deposition authority to all committees (except the Committee on Administration and Committee on Rules). H. Res. 5 § 3(b). • However, at least one member of the committee must be present unless (1) the witness agrees to waive the requirement or (2) the committee authorizes the deposition without the presence of a member, provided that the House is not in session. • Individual committee rules may impose additional conditions or requirements. – In the Senate, deposition authority is dictated by each committee’s rules. • For example, Senate Judiciary Committee Rule X provides that any subpoena for a deposition taken by staff shall be accompanied by notice identifying the staff designated to take the deposition. Majority and minority staff will have the opportunity to participate on equal terms. • Interviews: – Typically conducted by staff. – Some committees will transcribe interviews in the same manner in which a deposition would be transcribed. – Even when not being deposed, witnesses are subject to 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 and 1505. 12